Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39475087›Full record

ArticleAmerican journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists2025

An evaluation of vilobelimab (anti-C5a) as a cost-effective option to treat severely ill mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19.

Daniel C Malone, Joseph Biskupiak, Diana Brixner, Gary Oderda, Roger Seheult

Abstract readEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The cost-effectiveness of using vilobelimab with immunomodulators to treat severely ill mechanically ventilated patients with COVID-19: A subgroup analysis of the PANAMO study.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2026
    Trial
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Daniel C MaloneCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Joseph BiskupiakCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Diana BrixnerCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Gary OderdaCollege of Pharmacy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA.
Roger SeheultUniversity of California Riverside School of Medicine, Riverside, CA, and Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeCOVID-19 patients in intensive care units (ICUs) requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) have few available treatment options. PANAMO, a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 study of vilobelimab, which blocks the inflammatory process caused by complement component 5a, demonstrated a significant mortality benefit at 28 and 60 days in these patients. A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to assess the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY).

methodsA Markov model was used to estimate QALYs and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of vilobelimab plus standard of care (SOC) versus SOC alone. The model simulated progression from severe COVID-19 to survival or death over a lifetime horizon. Outcomes data (COVID-19 all-cause mortality and renal replacement therapy) were incorporated from the PANAMO trial. COVID-19 mortality estimates were based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention age-specific survival data. Utility values and hospital costs came from the literature. Vilobelimab cost was obtained from RED BOOK Online.

resultsFor COVID-19 ICU patients, total costs of care were $103,414 (SOC) and $132,247 (SOC plus vilobelimab), respectively, resulting in an incremental cost of $28,833. SOC provided 6.70 QALYs versus 7.99 QALYs for vilobelimab, an additional 1.29 QALYs. The ICER for vilobelimab plus SOC versus SOC alone was $22,287/QALY. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated the robustness of the cost-effectiveness result as vilobelimab plus SOC was favored at a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 in over 81% of iterations.

conclusionVilobelimab provides a cost-effective option to treat ICU patients with severe COVID-19 receiving IMV compared to SOC, at well below the commonly accepted $50,000 US willingness-to-pay threshold.

Indexed as

Antibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCOVID-19 Drug TreatmentRespiration, ArtificialAntibodies, NeutralizingClinical Trials as TopicCost-Benefit AnalysisCOVID-19Double-Blind MethodHumansIntensive Care UnitsMarkov ChainsMulticenter Studies as TopicQuality-Adjusted Life YearsSecondary Data AnalysisSeverity of Illness IndexAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntibodies, Neutralizingbamlanivimabcost-effectiveness analysisCOVID-19QALYquality adjusted life yearstreatment effectivenessvilobelimab

Identifiers

PMID39475087
PMCPMC12039489

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.